The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1887-11-18

in favor OF this amendment.
Rep. Kinney supported Noble Wide
manp's View.
Noble Smith quoted Cushing on Law
and Practice of Legislative Assemble" to
show that in the United States minority
could take up any matter it pleased
The motion carried.
Minister Brown moved that the words
Cabinet Council in rule L be changed to
read "Privy Counc" As it stood it was
| inconsistent with article % OF the Consti-
tuition.
Noble Dole moved an amendment to
| strike out the whole of what was LETT of
| rule L, as its scope was covered by the Con-
stitution He would like to know from
| Noble Castle what was the object for in
! sorting it.
| Noble Castle said it was customary for
| the provisions of the Constitution of any
| country to be carried out by legislative en-
ectment.
Noble Smith said that at least it did no
| harm, and he ceunselled leaving it in with
the amendment suggested by the Minister.
| Noble Widemann SAID there was no ar
| gument in saying it did no hahn. He did
not think it was of any use, and il SO it
should be struck out.
The amendment was lost, and the
| motion carried.
Rep. C. Brown moved that the word
consent in rule L be changed to lad
| vice. Carried.
Noble Smith moved that the 1rle, as
amended, be adopted. Carried.
Noble Smith asked Noble Castle what
| was the whole import of the words in rule
| 1.-The Legislature may expel any mem
| Der for cause" If a member were not
properly elected or eligible he could not be
expelled, but it might be done under other
| circumstances. 1t might be one Of them.
Were they members of the House?
Minister Ashford said that e the House
wanted to get rid of one of the Ministers it
| could always do so by vote of want of
| confidence.
Noble Widemann said that under the
| circumstances alluded to by Noble Smith
| it would simply be declaring the seat va
cant. That would be different thing to
| expulsion.
Noble Castle. replying to Noble Smith,
said the power of the Legislature over its
own members was unquestionable. 1t
| would be an extraordinary state OF things
| if the House could not interfere in the
event of a member behaving himself i'll
such a manner as to bring it into contempt
before the country. The question then
arose, was this to be the case? The Con
stitution provided that the House should
be the judge of the qualifications of
its members. There was no danger of a
member being expelled without sufficient
cause. The Government had tremendous
majority in the last Legislature, but they
did not dare to expel member.
Noble Widemann wished to know
whether Noble Castle had any American
precedents for the expulsion of members,
and if so, when it had been done, and why
He doubted whether this temptation
should be put in the way of the House.
Noble Castle instanced case of mem
Der being expelled for burglary.
Minister Ashford said that although pre-
cedents of expulsion were somewhat rare,
it was not difficult to find some. Quite re-
Gently DR.. Kenealy had been expelled from
the House of Commons on account of his
connection with the Tichborne suit, and
1t was also historical fact that William
Lyon Mackenzie, the leader of the Canad-
ion rebellion, was expelled no less than
+ five times from the Canadian Parliament.
/ Noble Smith called attention to the fact
that there was no motion before the
House. 1t had struck him the rule might
be more explanatory. Article 70 of the
Constitution provided that persons con-
victed of certain Offenses shall not sit in the
Legislature. He now moved an amend
ment to rule 81 by striking out the last
words, land the first and third shall be de-
cided without debate" 1t had the effect of
the previous question on the two motions
referred to: ("To lay on the table" and
ITO postpone to a certain time'').
Noble Castle said the object was to
shorten the business of the House. He
had been through four sessions and this
had often been very desirable.
The motion was lost
Noble Smith moved to strike out from
Rule 80 the words, "This question whether
a voted bill shall become law shall be de-
cided without debate and the sense of the
Assembly taken by calling the ayes and
noes" This was one of the most serious
and important duties which could come
before the House, and why in the name of
reason and common sense should the
House restrict its right of debate upon it !?
The Kings reason for vetoing the bill
might be valid one. The rule seemed in
consistent with itself. 1t said 1.-The House
shall then, by notion fix a time for con-
sidering," etc. Ordinarily it would dis
place the Ministry. 1t was to be pre-
sumed that His Majesty would not veto a
bill without consulting his Minister'S And
was the House to decide that weighty
question without debate? Article rs of
the Constitution said that any act done by
the King, unless otherwise expressed, shall
L. L Il. l. 4